When the important matters of our day are all but forgotten, I think the Clintons will still be remembered, if not accurately, then at least as meaningful figures of their time. Inside that couple is a Shakespearean play. Too bad all we have so far is Primary Colors.

As you all know, today marked Hillary Clinton’s official ascension to Secretary of State. That makes the Clintons the only American couple in history in which both husband and wife became one of the world’s most powerful people. That’s no small feat.

What I hope this marks is the end, or at least the beginning of the end, of the era when powerful, capable women served as hidden advisors to their powerful husbands. Obviously, women have served on their own merits in government for awhile now and I don’t mean to minimize their achievements. But there is still the expectation in our culture that powerful men will not have equally powerful wives. Hillary Clinton has fought that expectation and, despite her shortcomings, I admire her for her tenacity in the face of a culture that still sees her more as Bill’s wife than her own person.

Hillary Clinton lost her party’s presidential nomination and could have easily taken that as the ultimate sign that she would never rise above the position of senator. Instead, she did what few said was possible — she made nice with Barack Obama and secured for herself the most powerful position in the cabinet. She’s not the first (or even the second) woman to serve as Secretary of State and she still has to prove herself capable, but, thanks to her, fewer couples will feel compelled to make the either/or choice. Both husband and wife can aspire and achieve great heights. That seems obvious, but it’s a surprisingly new cultural phenomenon.

Not that this was ever really a realistic scenario, given that he’d have to give up his jet setting lifestyle to do a thankless job…but this was speculation we just couldn’t pass up.

From CNN:

Responding to such speculation, Clinton spokesman Matt McKenna tells CNN that “it’s completely false. President Clinton is excited to expand the work of his foundation which has more than 1,000 staff and volunteers in 44 countries advancing projects on HIV/AIDS, climate change, sustainable economic development and childhood obesity.”

Ultimately, history wasn’t behind this as it appears that the only former Presidents to go back to the legislature didn’t really have anything better to do…

Only two former presidents have made the move from the White House to Capitol Hill. President John Quincy Adams lost his re-election bid in 1828. Two years later he returned to Washington after winning election as a congressman from his home state of Massachusetts. He served in the House of Representatives until his death in 1848.

President Andrew Johnson, who served out the remainder of President Abraham Lincoln’s term, also served briefly in the Senate in 1875, seven years after Congress voted to impeach him.

And scene.

With Hillary Clinton headed to Foggy Bottom in January, speculation about her successor is heating up:

The task of choosing a successor falls to David Paterson, New York’s Democratic governor. Whomever he picks would serve for two years, before a special election in November 2010 to decide who fills the last two years of Clinton’s term.

Paterson has a strong bench to choose from. There are a number of contenders, including at least eight members of New York’s delegation in the House of Representatives, New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, Buffalo Mayor Byron Brown, Bronx Borough President Adolfo Carrion, Nassau County Executive Thomas Suozzi, Caroline Kennedy, and her cousin, Robert Kennedy Jr.

“This is not an election. This is not a campaign. It’s a constituency of one. David Paterson. It’s all about what the governor wants to do,” said political analyst Stuart Rothenberg, editor and publisher of The Rothenberg Political Report.

“Paterson has said he would prefer someone from upstate New York, or a woman or an Hispanic candidate,” Rothenberg said.

As for some of the more unconventional picks, Rothenberg said Paterson could “try to make a splash with a big name like Robert Kennedy Jr.” or a “quirky interesting pick” of someone like Caroline Kennedy, who is not a politician.

But some are suggesting the former president should take his wife’s seat.

In an op-ed column last week in The Washington Post, journalists Karl Meyer and Shareen Blair Brysac urged Paterson to “send Bill Clinton to the Senate.”

Personally, I can’t see it.

Even with the fact that his international activities are likely to be restricted once his wife takes office, it’s hard to see Bill Clinton becoming one man in a group of 100, and a junior member at that. Such a move has only happened twice before in American history; John Quincy Adams was elected to Congress from Massachusetts two years after losing a re-election bid to Andrew Jackson and Andrew Johnson became a Senator seven years after leaving office in disgrace.

It’s hard to see Bill Clinton joining that club.

This was the last thing that needed to happen, and Bill agreed to it last night. But it looks as if the Obama administration will really try to keep the ex-President in check because there were more conditions. A lot more.

From NY Times:

CHICAGO — Former President Bill Clinton has agreed to disclose publicly the names of more than 200,000 donors to his foundation as part of an accord with President-elect Barack Obama that clears the way for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to become secretary of state, Democrats close to both sides said on Saturday. [...]

The disclosure of contributors is among nine conditions that Mr. Clinton signed off on during discussions with representatives of Mr. Obama; all go beyond the requirements of law. Among other issues, he agreed to incorporate his Clinton Global Initiative separately from his foundation so that he has less direct involvement. The initiative, which promotes efforts to fight disease, poverty and climate change, would no longer hold annual meetings outside of the United States or accept new contributions from foreign governments.

Mr. Clinton also agreed to submit his future personal speeches and business activities for review by State Department ethics officials and, if necessary, by the White House counsel’s office.

In the end, this really isn’t asking much for an ex-President, and I hope Bill was very cooperative. He owes Hillary that and so much more.

It’s supposedly a done deal, so now the press can stop chattering about the Clintons being duplicitous and just accept the fact that Obama is genuinely forming a team of rivals.

From NY Times:

Mrs. Clinton came to her decision after additional discussion with President-elect Barack Obama about the nature of her role and his plans for foreign policy, said one of the confidants, who insisted on anonymity to discuss the situation. Mr. Obama’s office told reporters Thursday that the nomination is “on track” but Clinton associates only confirmed Friday afternoon that she has decided.

“She’s ready,” said the confidant. Mrs. Clinton was reassured after talking again with Mr. Obama because their first meeting in Chicago last week “was so general,” the confidant said. The purpose of the follow-up talk, he added, was not to extract particular concessions but “just getting comfortable” with the idea of working together.

A second Clinton associate confirmed that her camp believes they have a done deal. Senior Obama advisers said Friday morning that the offer had not been formally accepted and no announcement will be made until after Thanksgiving. But they said they were convinced that the nascent alliance was now ready to be sealed.

So the question is now…is Obama inviting drama into his White House? Because that’s what people claim the Clintons are almost genetically incapable of avoiding.

Well, we need to consider that when Hillary was a New York Senator, there was little to no drama coming out of her camp. Only when the presidential campaign spun up and Bill started running his mouth off did the drama start to reach a fever pitch. So it could be Bill who is actually the problem, and this shuts him down cold. Hillary is now the boss and Bill will be the sidekick. And I’m sure this is where she wanted him anyway.

Still, folks like Bob Woodward are baffled by this move…

Being president is about control, and tell me who ever controlled Bill or Hillary Clinton. They can’t control each other. … I think it’s because Warren Buffett and Paul Volcker and others have convinced Obama, ‘You’re going to have to focus like a laser on the economy. That’s issue Number One. And give Hillary and Bill the world.’ … I think people are fantasizing or smoking something if they think Joe Biden’s going to call Hillary Clinton up and say, ‘This is what we want you to do.’

OR…this will be a partnership between the three of them (Obama, Hillary & Joe) and they’ll work as a team.

Which scenario do you think is more plausible? Rogue Hillary or cooperative teamwork lead by Obama’s worldview?

Yes, that was rhetorical.

The will-she-or-won’t-she questions surrounding Hillary Clinton and the State Department took yet another turn this morning. Seems like Bill Clinton is willing to make some concessions to help his wife land the job:

Clinton has agreed to release the names of several major donors to his charitable foundation and will submit future foundation activities and paid speeches to a strict ethics review, said Democrats knowledgeable about the discussions.

They also said that Clinton would step away from day-to-day responsibility for his foundation while his wife serves and would alert the State Department any new sources of income and to his speechmaking. The Democrats spoke only on grounds of anonymity because of the private nature of the Cabinet-selection process.

If true, this development would seem to indicate Hillary Clinton wants the job, despite rumors to the contrary.

This has all devolved quickly into political theater, which is what you get whenever the Clintons are involved. I’m no longer even sure if Senator Clinton’s qualifications have anything to do with the possible State job. Is this just payback for her being a tireless Barack Obama booster and making sure her supporters didn’t bolt to John McCain? Is this just a way for Obama to kick Bill Clinton off the world stage (and a way for Hillary to finally get back at Bill by overtaking him in importance on the world stage)? Does this have anything to do with “change” or is this Chicago-style politics being played on the national stage?

In my mind, Senator Clinton’s qualifications for Secretary of State are quite average. Yes, she has traveled the globe and can leverage existing relationships with world leaders, but we have no proof that she’s exceptionally gifted in foreign policy or a particularly skilled diplomat. It’s like picking up a track star to play football. Sure, we know he can run, but can he catch too?

It’ll be interesting to see how this all plays out.

Earlier today we heard that Bill Clinton is getting vetted just to make sure that nothing embarrassing comes out if Hillary says yes, and now we hear that she’s going to accept the position…so does this mean that the vetting of Bill is over or close to it?

In any event…from the Guardian…

Hillary Clinton plans to accept the job of secretary of state offered by Barack Obama, who is reaching out to former rivals to build a broad coalition administration, the Guardian has learned.

Obama’s advisers have begun looking into Bill Clinton’s foundation, which distributes millions of dollars to Africa to help with development, to ensure that there is no conflict of interest. But Democrats do not believe that the vetting is likely to be a problem. [...]

Although the two clashed during the election campaign over tax policy and withdrawal from Iraq, they have more in common than they have differences. They both favour the closure of the Guantánamo Bay detention centre, an increase in US troops to Afghanistan, immigration reform, stem cell research and measures to tackle climate change, and oppose torture and the widespread use of wire-tapping.

Actually, even though it hasn’t been historically the best way to the Presidency in recent years, we all know that Biden won’t be running in 2016, so this keeps Hillary on the world stage, keeps Bill in a cage and therefore helps Obama keep everybody in check.

A brutally smart move here at first glance, but we’ll obviously have to see how it pans out. But considering that Hillary has branded herself as “tough”, I’m sure she’ll bring that and more back to Foggy Bottom.

Yes, once again, Bill gets in the way…

From This Week:

But there’s one significant complication: how to make sure that former President Clinton’s foreign speeches, business dealings and foundation work don’t present conflicts of interest. [...]

Here are some of the major questions that need to be addressed: How much public disclosure must there be of past foreign donations to the foundation? Is any more disclosure of foreign business and speaking income required? Are there other ways — short of or in addition to full disclosure — to vet for possible conflicts? Going forward, would the Clinton Foundation be permitted to continue soliciting foreign support? If so, under what conditions? How would the contributions be reviewed and vetted?

All of these questions can be answered, but getting there is complicated. It’s not done yet.

Hillary wouldn’t be where she is today without Bill, but is it also true that she can’t get any further because of Bill? I think we all saw how much damage he did during the primaries, and many of us guessed that he was pulling the strings behind the scenes. That turned out to be fairly accurate, so if you get Hillary, you also get Bill…and that’s not always the best deal.

Still, I think Bill could be a huge asset on the international scene and any potential problems he brings up would be offset by his star power and shrewdness. For president I didn’t like the idea of a “dynamic duo”, but in the Secretary of State capacity I’m fine with Hillary and Bill being a package deal.

These are the reports I’m hearing and neither the Clinton folks nor the Obama folks are denying it…which is a sure sign that this is on the table.

Ben Smith details…

Andrea Mitchell reported this evening that Obama is considering Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, something that’s been buzzed about as a possibility for a few days.

I haven’t been able to confirm it, and neither Obama nor Clinton camps would comment, though NBC apparently has confirmation that she went to Chicago today.

One interesting item: Clinton aides are not knocking the report down, which they might.

“Any speculation about cabinet or other administration appointments is really for President-Elect Obama’s transition team to address,” emails spokesman Philippe Reines.

And then this from Mike Allen…

[...] some Obama advisers argue that her celebrity and credibility would be a huge asset in his goal of reengaging the United States with allies.

“You can send John Kerry or Chuck Hagel,” said one adviser, mentioning some other candidates for secretary of state, “or you can send Hillary Clinton. That’s totally different.”

Clinton would be most attractive if Obama concludes that he will have to focus his early days in office on the domestic economy, and will have to essentially outsource heavy-duty foreign travel to his secretary of State.

The officials said Clinton becomes even more attractive if Obama retains President Bush’s last secretary of Defense, Robert Gates. Some Obama advisers are advocated that course because he would provide cover for drawing down troops in Iraq: Gates has said he believes that is possible, and it would keep Obama out of a fight he can’t afford with the Army Gen. David Petraeus, now the head of the U.S. Central Command.

And with Hillary you get Bill. Then there’s Biden. With the three of them in the mix, that’s a pretty solid lineup to travel abroad and create some good will.

More as it develops…

Because Obama didn’t want his transition to be like Bill Clinton’s, which by all indications was an unmitigated disaster.

From Ambinder…

In 1992, the only Democrats who had run the White House in the past quarter century had worked for Jimmy Carter — and Carter’s tenure didn’t exactly inspire confidence. Clinton had James Carville — the most brilliant Democratic strategist at the time, and he had a lot of young guns. But he did not have a John Podesta to walk him through what it took to ran the White House, and certainly not a Rahm Emanuel.

The Clinton team thought that the cabinet mattered more than the White House staff, and spent a lot of time arguing, deciding, negotiating over cabinet picks. But the real power and control in Washington is centered in the White House…that was true even in the Bush White House with its high-profile roster of cabinet appointments. (David Addington, anyone?)

The White House staff was not named until just before Christmas — a mistake. They didn’t get their bearings until well into the administration.

All encouraging signs and hopefully it bodes well for what will come after.

Do note that these are just clips cut together. Clinton did voice his support for Obama even though he complimented McCain quite a bit.

I actually buy that she didn’t want the spot since being VP is pretty thankless job. She still has a lot to do in the Senate, and I think she’ll become majority leader even though there are many in line before her.

Obama scores a 5 point bump from yesterday to regain a sizable lead and hit the 48% mark for the first time since his overseas trip.

And, as Gallup notes, these numbers don’t take into account Clinton and Biden’s speeches…

The latest three-day Gallup Poll Daily tracking average (Aug. 25-27) is directly coincident with the first three days of the Democratic National Convention in Denver, and is no doubt beginning to reflect the typical convention “bounce” that Gallup has observed in most party conventions in recent decades.

There is a lag of sorts involved in the daily tracking; interviewing is conducted in most parts of the country before that evening’s high-focus speeches have taken place. Thus, the current three-day average would reflect any impact of Monday night’s speech by Michelle Obama, and Tuesday night’s speech by Hillary Clinton, but would not completely reflect Wednesday night’s lineup of speakers, such as John Kerry, former President Bill Clinton, and vice presidential nominee Joe Biden, nor the appearance on stage at the end of the evening by Barack Obama himself.

I am genuinely surprised that Obama has received this much of a bounce from the first couple days of the convention. Still, I guess this is why they do these things, eh?

More tomorrow…

“People around the world have always been more impressed by the power of our example than by the example of our power.”
- Bill Clinton in an incredibly well received speech.

I was impressed as well. This is a man I’ve lost a lot of respect for over the past 8 months, but last night’s speech was definitely a giant leap forward on the path to redemption.

Still, I hope that he attends Obama’s speech tonight.

More as it develops…

Without leaners
Obama – 44%
McCain – 44%

McCain edges up one and this is significant since he hasn’t really been above the 45% mark for a while in the “with leaners” numbers. So now this is two straight days, which could position him well for sustaining any type of bump he gets from his Veep announcement and the Republican’s convention.

What’s more, this is even more evidence that Biden has not helped Obama in the short term polling, although Hillary’s speech last night could sway folks that a vote for McCain would be a vote against her.

Also, with Bill Clinton set to speak tonight, Rasmussen shares some intriguing numbers…

Clinton is viewed Very Favorably by just 46% of Democrats while 62% are that enthusiastic about Obama. One factor may be that just 52% of Democrats believe Bill Clinton wants Barack Obama to win the White House in November.

Does Bill Clinton want Obama to win? Deep down I bet he does, but he hasn’t been very enthusiastic about it, and that could ultimately hurt him long term with Dems. I know his antics during this campaign cycle have certainly made me respect him a lot less.

The 5 day w/leaners:
08/27/2008: McCain – 47%, Obama – 46%
08/26/2008: McCain – 46%, Obama – 46%
08/25/2008: McCain – 45%, Obama – 48%
08/24/2008: McCain – 45%, Obama – 48%
08/23/2008: McCain – 46%, Obama – 48%

The 5 day w/o leaners:
08/27/2008: McCain – 44%, Obama – 44%
08/26/2008: McCain – 44%, Obama – 44%
08/25/2008: McCain – 42%, Obama – 46%
08/24/2008: McCain – 43%, Obama – 46%
08/23/2008: McCain – 42%, Obama – 45%

More tomorrow…

Gotta love this down home folksy political wisdom for Billary…

“Suppose you’re a voter, and you’ve got candidate X and candidate Y. Candidate X agrees with you on everything, but you don’t think that candidate can deliver on anything at all. Candidate Y you agree with on about half the issues, but he can deliver. Which candidate are you going to vote for?”

Umm….what are you trying to say Bill?

“This has nothing to do with what’s going on now.”

Ahhhhh, glad you pointed that out. See, because I thought you were talking about Obama and McCain. But if you weren’t, then cool. I see now, you were just playing a fun little logic game that just so happened to parallel what voters may be thinking about the current Democratic and Republican candidates. Cool. Got ya.

Anyway, I’ve got a scenario for you Bill. Try this one on for size…

Let’s say you’ve got this former President, let’s call him Former President B. And he’s acting as a surrogate for his wife, let’s call her Candidate H, during her campaign to win the White House. The only problem is her rival, Candidate O, has out-messaged and out-organized her at every turn. What to do? Well, if you’re Former President B, you go to work trying to frame Candidate O as somebody who won’t be able to get anything done. You even go so far as to suggest that Candidate O’s candidacy is only succeeding in certain locales because of his race. Other contests throughout the election prove this to be a false assertion, but if you’re President B and you desperately want to get back into the White House on Candidate H’s coattails so you can be sort of a shadow President, you’d pretty much have your campaign do or say anything, right? Like talking about Candidate O’s drug use as a teen, or leaking pictures of Candidate O in weird, foreign outfits or releasing videos of Candidate O’s pastor saying crazy stuff.

Silly thing, though, all of these gambits fall short and Candidate H fails in her bid to win the nomination for her party. What to do? Well, if you’re Former President B, do you think something as silly as not winning will stop you? Pffft. Puh-leez. No, you’ll try to systematically make it hard for Candidate O to get a foothold with Candidate H’s voters because you know that if Candidate O fails to win the Presidency, well, Candidate H can start running for President next time around.

Sound familiar? No? Well it shouldn’t, because it was just a scenario. Doesn’t have anything to do with what has gone on in 2008. I’m just putting it out there because it would be REALLY sad and pathetic if something like that were to happen. I mean, who would respect Former President B after doing that stuff? I know I wouldn’t.

Okay, enough of that fun…

By the way, Candidate X? Really? Do you think you could have picked ANY other letter than one associated with a famous militant black leader?

Thanks for being awesome Bill.

More evidence of what many suspected a Hillary presidency would bring with it: Bill Clinton 2.0.

This extremely revealing little factoid is buried in a story from Politico about the upcoming story from The Atlantic that details hundreds of memos that were leaked to reporter Joshua Green…

The famous 3 a.m. ad, written by Penn and approved by Clinton, almost didn’t run: “In the days leading up to Ohio and Texas, the campaign kept arguing over whether to air the [3 a.m.] ad. With the deadline looming, Bill Clinton, speaking from a cell phone as his plane sat on a runway, led a conference call on Thursday, Feb. 28, in which he had both sides present their case. As his plane was about to lift off, it was Bill Clinton — not Hillary — who issued the decisive order: ‘Let’s go with it.’”

This doesn’t surprise me in the least, but it certainly sends a chill down my spine. Because this ad was obviously going to be controversial and Hillary had to know it. So to have Bill make the final call instead of her speaks volumes as to how much power he actually had behind the scenes and how much she differed to him to make potentially campaign altering decisions.

In any event, I’m more convinced than ever that the Dems went with the right candidate.

Edwards had cast himself in his political career as an exemplar of a moral life and a good marriage, and he was a harsh critic of former President Bill Clinton for his Oval Office affair.

“I think this president has shown a remarkable disrespect for his office, for the moral dimensions of leadership, for his friends, for his wife, for his precious daughter,” Edwards said in 1999. “It is breathtaking to me the level to which that disrespect has risen.”

Judge not…

From NY Daily News:

WASHINGTON – Bill Clinton regrets some things he said – and didn’t say – on the campaign trail. But there’s one thing he still can’t utter: Barack Obama is ready to be President.

“You can argue that nobody is ready to be President,” the former President told ABC News.

“You can argue that even if you’ve been vice president for eight years, that no one can be fully ready for the pressures of the office,” Clinton said Monday during a visit to Rwanda.

You can also argue that a former President who misspoke repeatedly during the primaries wasn’t ready to get back on the campaign trail and scuttled his wife’s chances in what should have been a cakewalk.

I think it’s pretty obvious that Clinton does himself no favors by acting like this, but it’s his legacy and I guess he can ruin it if he wants to.

Moving on…

What do you think?

[Listen Online] or [Download]

[Subscribe to 2008Central.net's Presidential Election Podcast]

Feel free to email us questions/suggestions for our next podcast (you can also email an audio file of your question and we’ll include it in the podcast).